Re: Add comment explaining why queryid is int64 in pg_stat_statements

Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>

From: Nathan Bossart <nathandbossart@gmail.com>
To: Michael Paquier <michael@paquier.xyz>
Cc: David Rowley <dgrowleyml@gmail.com>, Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>, Lukas Fittl <lukas@fittl.com>, Shaik Mohammad Mujeeb <mujeeb.sk@zohocorp.com>, ilyaevdokimov <ilya.evdokimov@tantorlabs.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>, mujeebskdev <mujeeb.sk.dev@gmail.com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@kurilemu.de>, Tomas Vondra <tomas@vondra.me>
Date: 2025-05-29T14:28:35Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Commits

Same data as JSON: GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources. API reference →
  1. Change internal plan ID type from uint64 to int64

  2. Change internal queryid type from uint64 to int64

  3. pg_stat_statements: Widen query IDs from 32 bits to 64 bits.

On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 01:53:07PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
> On Thu, May 22, 2025 at 01:01:14PM +0900, Michael Paquier wrote:
>> I have added an open item about the plan ID part as it applies to v18,
>> adding the RMT in CC to get an opinion.  If we cannot get a consensus
>> on all that, letting things as they are is still logically correct,
>> even with the -Wwarnings-format-signedness argument which is not
>> included by default currently.
>> 
>> Has somebody an opinion to offer?
> 
> It has been one week since this last update, and there has been
> nothing except the sound of cicadas.  IMO, I think that we should just
> pull the switch and make both of these IDs signed on HEAD, taking case
> of the potential signedness warning issues.
> 
> Now, I don't really want to take a leap of faith without the RMT being
> OK with that now that we are in beta1.

After reading through this thread and the latest patch set, I don't see any
strong reason for the RMT to object to this change for v18.  IIUC some
extensions may need to adapt, but we're still a few months from 18.0, so
that seems okay.  I vaguely recall that we've made other small
extension-breaking changes during the beta period for previous major
releases.

-- 
nathan